Do you think there is a chance that we’d put an 81 year old man in charge again? OH…you said “a charlatan” I thought you said “the charlatan”. Either way - attack the issue, but harping on a guy who will likely be dead before the next decade accomplishes nothing.
No but se would put in or keep other dipshits in place for 50 years with zero experience and then classify them as the “leading expert”.
Drop the word “other” and you’ve got the issue. Here’[s the deal…you said yourself that half the country still likes Fauci. I’m not sure if you remember, but Fauci was bashed since about April 2020, yet 50% of the people still like him. So if you don’t use his name, then they can see the things you are talking about and they might just say “you’ve got a point”. But we have to make the “news” personal. And if you dis a person someone else likes, they’ll turn you off.
-
I didn’t say they liked him, I said they believed him.
-
He has been lying since at least February of 2020
When you personalize something for a guy that a lot of people believe, they are less likely to believe you on this one. Had an article been able to say what happened without saying "Fauci did it. Perhaps something like this - which was in the article - might allow progress instead of this fucking he said she said bullshit.
"I do think it illustrates one point that’s worth really focusing on: when you have a group of people that decide there can only be one point of view, that’s problematic,” he said. “And I’ll keep on saying that’s antithetical to science and unfortunately that’s what they did.”
See…problem identified without naming names, suggestion made without blaming anybody. Shit…if you don’t see the word “Fauci”, the there isn’t a need for a guy to come out and defend anything. But…toss that name in and YOUR SIDE ends up keeping him in the news.
Do you think we should get to the bottom of where Covid started and what to do to avoid something similar?
There is little evidence it was intentional. I have heard some theories that it was intentional to silence Hong Kong.
Not sure I buy that. The problem is the Chinese just do some weird shit. So it’s possible but I think it’s most likely false
Yes. But those “investigations” invariably turn into anti Fauci screeds. So insisting of focusing on a person that half the people trust means you just turned off 50% of the people. Focus on what we did and avoid the "who did it’. Because I don’t know if it’s just me, but for the past decade or so, we have been required to blame SOMEBODY. And we get so caught up in blame that the message we want is obscured.
Who is the main person associated with Covid, vaccines, masks and lockdowns?
What good does reminding people of the past accomplish? Do we want to fix the problem or just point to Fauci and say "he did it’. That’s accomplishes a lot. It is kind of like when the dog pees in the house and you beat the shit out of him the following week for doing it
The American people want the facts and the responsible people held accountable. We also want to make sure it never happens again. Why are you so worried about an investigation and protecting Fauci?
What do we do to hold Fauci accountable?..Do we throw him in jail?
Do we assess him a fine? It the answer to either of those is “no”, then you really aren’t holding him accountable, so it’s a waste of time and effort and detracts from the goal of insuring that it never happens again.
So, in that investigation, don’t you think it is important to find out if the leading “expert” was actively suppressing information that would lead to a certain conclusion?
What good will it do? Look at the ACTION and not the person. You might get more people to follow you. You already said the half the people believe him, and God bless our nation, it was “us against Fauci” from the day we first learned his name in 2020. So if you insist on punishing Fauci, some people will remember what “side” they were on in the Fauci wars and shut you down.
I’m not defending Fauci, but I’m only suggesting a better way to get your point across.
An interesting take on the whole thing.
1 Like
His calculation was that, on a whole-society basis, the collateral damage of lockdowns would outweigh what good they do.
Yes. Yes. 100% yes.
This was my problem with the entire left half of America from the get go. Virtually nobody wanted to talk about the unintended side effects of lockdowns, both economic & social.
Mental health problems & an alarming jump in national debt are serious issues & may well have outweighed any savings in life or health that occurred as a result. It was far more alarming how many people did not stop to think about these concerns & weigh them against their fairly uninformed assumptions about the benefits of the lockdowns & mask police.
I know in my own personal experience, whenever the authorities start helping themselves to more power, regardless of the reasons given, my first impulse is to question their motives.
Brainless dipshit news consumers nationwide quickly said “Hurr durr anyone that disagrees with lockdowns & mask mandates is anti-science.” But as usual, their thinking was unacceptably facile & naive. Science doesn’t measure society-wide compliance with mandates that a huge proportion of the nation disagrees with.
Having recommendations & advisories would have gone over much smoother than the bullying culture — buttressed by fines & public shaming — that occurred instead.
My hat is off to the government officials of Sweden. They know how to govern. The rest of the world’s leaders are pathetically authoritarian & combative with their own people, & thus ineffective due to all the mistrust they sow.
Btw I had no idea about the academic grade inflation across the western world. That is bizarre & scary.
We need to point out that Sweden followed the same plan we were supposed to follow.
Their expert really was an expert and viewed by the world as an expert.
So right or wrong, he did it from a scientific perspective and not making shit up on the fly.
I’m not sure there was a saving in lives. Drugs death went up and deaths from cancer and heart conditions.
It was a classic case of government attempting to exceed its natural limitations, doing a predictably horrible job of it, and then bragging about it, as if it was some amazing act. And hundreds of millions of dimwits thanked them for it.
And still do. Notice Sweden didn’t force mask on students. Yet they didn’t have the mass casualties we claimed they’d have
I said from the beginning Sweden had the right path and certain simps argued with me fiercely.
I trusted Anders. He’s a world class expert. Fauci isn’t a world class expert. He’s fairly incompetent and that predates COVID.
Anders used science, educated guesses and a plan that was in place before the pandemic. Basically he did what all the experts had agreed to do from the start. He did adjust as needed but didn’t make rash and stupid decisions